A Family Tree in Every Gene [Races DO Exist: NYT]

NY Times Op-Ed Page ^ | March 14, 2005 | ARMAND MARIE LEROI

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[SunkenCiv]

the idea that even the slightest detectable variation within any other species constitutes a distinct "subspecies", in need of separate protection under endangered species laws, has also been the "consensus" (in certain circles) for about the same period of time

Well put.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Pharmboy.

Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on, off, or alter the "Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list --
Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
The GGG Digest -- Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

[Wonder Warthog]

"Human DNA consists of about 3 billion bases, and more than 99 percent of those bases are the same in all people."

Yes, and we have, as I recall, 95% to 97% commonality with chimpanzees, as well.

"What percent do you think it will be?"

My guess is that it'll be in the 99.9999% or greater fraction. Which number has no validity, as we don't yet have sufficient complete genome data available to identify the "race-specific" gene clusters. It is, however, self-evident that such clusters and characteristics are there, and quite real.

[cyborg]

Yes indeed...bttt

[cyborg]

The identification of racial origins is not a search for purity.

*** Oh really? Since when! LOL

[Smartaleck]

"Which number has no validity, as we don't yet have sufficient complete genome data available to identify the "race-specific" gene clusters"

Depends on how much of a racist one is (and I don't mean that in the pejoritive sense of the word but as a matter of study of the differences between humans.)

At some point you get into what percent a person is of one race or another and it gets down right silly.

For example, what percent of any race does Tiger Woods, or Baraka Obama have to be to be called either one race or another? 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/50th? Are there any people who are 100% Native Americna Indians? Even if we can decide on a percent, for what purpose?

[Fiddlstix]

I had my genes removed. I only wear slacks.

To paraphrase Kermit the frog....
"It ain't easy bein' blue".

[Conspiracy Guy]

Khaki!

[thefactor]

So first there are no races. We are just one family of homogeniety. Now we are made up of a number of races and we are to celebrate our diversity while continuing to interbreed because, of course, the only differences attributed to race are physical differences. While The Times may have changed their direction, they always seem to end up at the same destination.

[Wonder Warthog]

"At some point you get into what percent a person is of one race or another and it gets down right silly."

Wrong---it is literally "deathly serious" (see below).

"For example, what percent of any race does Tiger Woods, or Baraka Obama have to be to be called either one race or another? 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/50th? Are there any people who are 100% Native Americna Indians? Even if we can decide on a percent, for what purpose?"

For treatment of illness, for one very important thing. There is already a problem in finding sufficiently close genetic matches for some mixed-race children for organ transplants, to name just one example. Some races have specific diseases to which others are more immune (sickle cell anemia for "blacks"--superior AIDS resistance for "whites"---I'm sure there are others).

[Pharmboy]

Only when scientists do it is it NOT a search for purity. when ignorant Nazis do it...well, we know the rest.

[cyborg]

When scientists were doing it back in the 1800s it was all about racial purity. Otherwise where did all the oddball racial theories come from? I have no reason to think that it would be any different now. Human beings are sinful fallen creatures prone to the game of oneupmanship.

[cyborg]

BTW, I'm not saying the research isn't legitimate or useful but the history of science is what it is.

[cyborg]

There was a story about a white Marine of a German derivation I think and an Asian woman who were a genetic match. He gave her a kidney or something then later they got married. It was on FR but don't remember when it came out. Sometimes I wonder if the organ transplant system needs to be more refined.

[Pharmboy]

Oh...now I got you.

The 18th and 19th century scientists and non-scientists who were looking inbto this stuff were so backward in knowledge compared to where we are now and had such an uninformed social overlay that it's hard to make sense about what they said about human races. But I do see your point...

[Wonder Warthog]

"Sometimes I wonder if the organ transplant system needs to be more refined."

I suspect it is being continuously refined. I'm sure as the instruments for genotyping get cheaper and faster that more and more accurate genetic matches will be made. We are just in the very infancy of the use of DNA/genetic knowledge in the treatment of disease.

[cyborg]

Agreed. I see the future of medicine being very custom tailored to a person's genetic profile.

[Smartaleck]

"For treatment of illness, for one very important thing."

Can be. But it's not the race per se that is the determinate, as much as the bloodline. Hemophilia for example, prevalent to whites and only certain ones, could be passed to other races but the race isn't as important as the family tree. As you correctly stated it becomes even less useful as the "races" mix thus making the use of race even more irrelevant. While the use of race might have some use as a medical tool, it quite damaging when used for social purposes. For example, why the he** should Michael Jordan's kids get a priority acceptance to college over a brighter white kid from a poor family solely due to race?

[aculeus]

I strongly recommend ...

1. Armand Marie Leroi's own book.

2. His comments on (ahem) a certain non-scientist's views as covered in this article

http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/articleprint.php?num=16

A PDF of his paper "Cancer Selection" is found here:

http://armandleroi.com/images/pdf2.gif